In recent years, de agency began undertaking a warge-scawe effort to consowidate its 25 operations in de Washington Metropowitan Area, moving from its main headqwarters in Rockviwwe and severaw fragmented office buiwdings to de former site of de Navaw Ordnance Laboratory in de White Oak area of Siwver Spring, Marywand.[8][14] The site was renamed from de White Oak Navaw Surface Warfare Center to de Federaw Research Center at White Oak. The first buiwding, de Life Sciences Laboratory, was dedicated and opened wif 104 empwoyees on de campus in December 2003. Onwy one originaw buiwding from de navaw faciwity was kept. Aww oder buiwdings are new construction, uh-hah-hah-hah.[15] The project is swated to be compweted by 2017, assuming future Congressionaw funding [16]

Whiwe most of de Centers are wocated in de Washington, D.C. area as part of de Headqwarters divisions, two offices – de Office of Reguwatory Affairs (ORA) and de Office of Criminaw Investigations (OCI) – are primariwy fiewd offices wif a workforce spread across de country.

The Office of Reguwatory Affairs is considered de "eyes and ears" of de agency, conducting de vast majority of de FDA's work in de fiewd. Consumer Safety Officers, more commonwy cawwed Investigators, are de individuaws who inspect production and warehousing faciwities, investigate compwaints, iwwnesses, or outbreaks, and review documentation in de case of medicaw devices, drugs, biowogicaw products, and oder items where it may be difficuwt to conduct a physicaw examination or take a physicaw sampwe of de product.

The Office of Reguwatory Affairs is divided into five regions, which are furder divided into 20 districts. Districts are based roughwy on de geographic divisions of de federaw court system. Each district comprises a main district office and a number of Resident Posts, which are FDA remote offices dat serve a particuwar geographic area. ORA awso incwudes de Agency's network of reguwatory waboratories, which anawyze any physicaw sampwes taken, uh-hah-hah-hah. Though sampwes are usuawwy food-rewated, some waboratories are eqwipped to anawyze drugs, cosmetics, and radiation-emitting devices.

The Office of Criminaw Investigations was estabwished in 1991 to investigate criminaw cases. Unwike ORA Investigators, OCI Speciaw Agents are armed, and don't focus on technicaw aspects of de reguwated industries. OCI agents pursue and devewop cases where individuaws and companies have committed criminaw actions, such as frauduwent cwaims, or knowingwy and wiwwfuwwy shipping known aduwterated goods in interstate commerce. In many cases, OCI pursues cases invowving Titwe 18 viowations (e.g., conspiracy, fawse statements, wire fraud, maiw fraud), in addition to prohibited acts as defined in Chapter III of de FD&C Act. OCI Speciaw Agents often come from oder criminaw investigations backgrounds, and work cwosewy wif de Federaw Bureau of Investigation, Assistant Attorney Generaw, and even Interpow. OCI receives cases from a variety of sources—incwuding ORA, wocaw agencies, and de FBI—and works wif ORA Investigators to hewp devewop de technicaw and science-based aspects of a case. OCI is a smawwer branch, comprising about 200 agents nationwide.

The FDA reguwates more dan US$1 triwwion worf of consumer goods, about 25% of consumer expenditures in de United States. This incwudes $466 biwwion in food sawes, $275 biwwion in drugs, $60 biwwion in cosmetics and $18 biwwion in vitamin suppwements. Much of dese expenditures are for goods imported into de United States; de FDA is responsibwe for monitoring imports.[17]

The FDA's federaw budget reqwest for fiscaw year (FY) 2012 totawed $4.36 biwwion,[3] whiwe de proposed 2014 budget is $4.7 biwwion, uh-hah-hah-hah.[18] About $2 biwwion of dis budget is generated by user fees. Pharmaceuticaw firms pay de majority of dese fees,[18] which are used to expedite drug reviews.[19] The FDA's federaw budget reqwest for fiscaw year (FY) 2008 (October 2007 drough September 2008) totawed $2.1 biwwion, a $105.8 miwwion increase from what it received for fiscaw year 2007.[20]

In February 2008, de FDA announced dat de Bush Administration's FY 2009 budget reqwest for de agency was just under $2.4 biwwion: $1.77 biwwion in budget audority (federaw funding) and $628 miwwion in user fees. The reqwested budget audority was an increase of $50.7 miwwion more dan de FY 2008 funding – about a dree percent increase. In June 2008, Congress gave de agency an emergency appropriation of $150 miwwion for FY 2008 and anoder $150 miwwion, uh-hah-hah-hah.[17]

The programs for safety reguwation vary widewy by de type of product, its potentiaw risks, and de reguwatory powers granted to de agency. For exampwe, de FDA reguwates awmost every facet of prescription drugs, incwuding testing, manufacturing, wabewing, advertising, marketing, efficacy, and safety—yet FDA reguwation of cosmetics focuses primariwy on wabewing and safety. The FDA reguwates most products wif a set of pubwished standards enforced by a modest number of faciwity inspections. Inspection observations are documented on Form 483.

Heawf Canada and de United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under de RCC mandate, undertook de "first of its kind" initiative by sewecting "as its first area of awignment common cowd indications for certain over-de-counter antihistamine ingredients (GC 2013-01-10)."[26]

The reguwation of food and dietary suppwements by de U.S. Food and Drug Administration is governed by various statutes enacted by de United States Congress and interpreted by de FDA. Pursuant to de Federaw Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act ("de Act") and accompanying wegiswation, de FDA has audority to oversee de qwawity of substances sowd as food in de United States, and to monitor cwaims made in de wabewing about bof de composition and de heawf benefits of foods.

The FDA subdivides substances dat it reguwates as food into various categories—incwuding foods, food additives, added substances (man-made substances dat are not intentionawwy introduced into food, but neverdewess end up in it), and dietary suppwements. Specific standards de FDA exercises differ from one category to de next. Furdermore, wegiswation had granted de FDA a variety of means to address viowations of standards for a given substance category.

The Center for Drug Evawuation and Research uses different reqwirements for de dree main drug product types: new drugs, generic drugs, and over-de-counter drugs. A drug is considered "new" if it is made by a different manufacturer, uses different excipients or inactive ingredients, is used for a different purpose, or undergoes any substantiaw change. The most rigorous reqwirements appwy to new mowecuwar entities: drugs dat are not based on existing medications.

New drugs receive extensive scrutiny before FDA approvaw in a process cawwed a new drug appwication (NDA).[27] Critics, however, argue dat de FDA standards are not sufficientwy rigorous, awwowing unsafe or ineffective drugs to be approved.[28] New drugs are avaiwabwe onwy by prescription by defauwt. A change to over-de-counter (OTC) status is a separate process, and de drug must be approved drough an NDA first. A drug dat is approved is said to be "safe and effective when used as directed".

Some very rare wimited exceptions to dis muwti-step process invowving animaw testing and controwwed cwinicaw triaws can be granted out of compassionate use protocows, as was de case during de 2015 Ebowa epidemic wif de use, by prescription and audorization, of ZMapp and oder experimentaw treatments, and for new drugs dat can be used to treat debiwitating and/or very rare conditions for which no existing remedies or drugs are satisfactory, or where dere has not been an advance in a wong period of time. The studies are progressivewy wonger, graduawwy adding more individuaws as dey progress from stage I to stage III, normawwy over a period of years, and normawwy invowve drug companies, de government and its waboratories, and often medicaw schoows and hospitaws and cwinics. However, any exceptions to de aforementioned process are subject to strict review and scrutiny and conditions, and are onwy given if a substantiaw amount of research and at weast some prewiminary human testing has shown dat dey are bewieved to be somewhat safe and possibwy effective.

The FDA's Office of Prescription Drug Promotion reviews and reguwates prescription drug advertising and promotion drough surveiwwance activities and issuance of enforcement wetters to pharmaceuticaw manufacturers. Advertising and promotion for over-de-counter drugs is reguwated by de Federaw Trade Commission.

The drug advertising reguwation[29] contains two broad reqwirements: (1) a company may advertise or promote a drug onwy for de specific indication or medicaw use for which it was approved by FDA. Awso, an advertisement must contain a "fair bawance" between de benefits and de risks (side effects) of a drug.

The term off-wabew refers to drug usage for indications oder dan dose approved by de FDA.

After NDA approvaw, de sponsor must review and report to de FDA every patient adverse drug experience it wearns of. They must report unexpected serious and fataw adverse drug events widin 15 days, and oder events on a qwarterwy basis.[30] The FDA awso receives directwy adverse drug event reports drough its MedWatch program.[31] These reports are cawwed "spontaneous reports" because reporting by consumers and heawf professionaws is vowuntary.

Whiwe dis remains de primary toow of postmarket safety surveiwwance, FDA reqwirements for postmarketing risk management are increasing. As a condition of approvaw, a sponsor may be reqwired to conduct additionaw cwinicaw triaws, cawwed Phase IV triaws. In some cases, de FDA reqwires risk management pwans ("Risk Evawuation and Mitigation Strategy" or "REMS") for some drugs dat reqwire actions to be taken to ensure dat de drug is used safewy.[32][33] For exampwe, dawidomide can cause birf defects but has uses dat outweigh de risks if men and women taking de drugs do not conceive a chiwd; a REMS program for dawidomide mandates an auditabwe process to ensure dat peopwe taking de drug take action to avoid pregnancy; many opioid drugs have REMS programs to avoid addiction and diversion of drugs.[32]

Generic drugs are chemicaw eqwivawents of name-brand drugs whose patents have expired.[34] In generaw, dey are wess expensive dan deir name brand counterparts, are manufactured and marketed by oder companies and, in de 1990s, accounted for about a dird of aww prescriptions written in de United States.[34] For approvaw of a generic drug, de U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reqwires scientific evidence dat de generic drug is interchangeabwe wif or derapeuticawwy eqwivawent to de originawwy approved drug.[35] This is cawwed an "ANDA" (Abbreviated New Drug Appwication). As of 2012 80% of aww FDA approved drugs are avaiwabwe in generic form.

In 1989, a major scandaw erupted invowving de procedures used by de FDA to approve generic drugs for sawe to de pubwic.[34] Charges of corruption in generic drug approvaw first emerged in 1988, in de course of an extensive congressionaw investigation into de FDA. The oversight subcommitee of de United States House Energy and Commerce Committee resuwted from a compwaint brought against de FDA by Mywan Laboratories Inc. of Pittsburgh. When its appwication to manufacture generics were subjected to repeated deways by de FDA, Mywan, convinced dat it was being discriminated against, soon began its own private investigation of de agency in 1987. Mywan eventuawwy fiwed suit against two former FDA empwoyees and four drug-manufacturing companies, charging dat corruption widin de federaw agency resuwted in racketeering and in viowations of antitrust waw. "The order in which new generic drugs were approved was set by de FDA empwoyees even before drug manufacturers submitted appwications" and, according to Mywan, dis iwwegaw procedure was fowwowed to give preferentiaw treatment to certain companies. During de summer of 1989, dree FDA officiaws (Charwes Y. Chang, David J. Brancato, Wawter Kwetch) pweaded guiwty to criminaw charges of accepting bribes from generic drugs makers, and two companies (Par Pharmaceuticaw and its subsidiary Quad Pharmaceuticaws)[36] pweaded guiwty to giving bribes.

Furdermore, it was discovered dat severaw manufacturers had fawsified data submitted in seeking FDA audorization to market certain generic drugs. Vitarine Pharmaceuticaws of New York, which sought approvaw of a generic version of de drug Dyazide, a medication for high bwood pressure, submitted Dyazide, rader dan its generic version, for de FDA tests. In Apriw 1989, de FDA investigated 11 manufacturers for irreguwarities; and water brought dat number up to 13. Dozens of drugs were eventuawwy suspended or recawwed by manufacturers. In de earwy 1990s, de U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission fiwed securities fraud charges against de Bowar Pharmaceuticaw Company, a major generic manufacturer based in Long Iswand, New York.[34]

Over-de-counter (OTC) drugs wike aspirin are drugs and combinations dat do not reqwire a doctor's prescription, uh-hah-hah-hah.[37] The FDA has a wist of approximatewy 800 approved ingredients dat are combined in various ways to create more dan 100,000 OTC drug products. Many OTC drug ingredients had been previouswy approved prescription drugs now deemed safe enough for use widout a medicaw practitioner's supervision wike ibuprofen.[38]

In 2014, de FDA added an Ebowa treatment being devewoped by Canadian pharmaceuticaw company Tekmira to de Fast Track program, but hawted de phase 1 triaws in Juwy pending de receipt of more information about how de drug works. This is seen as increasingwy important in de face of a major outbreak of de disease in West Africa dat began in wate March 2014 and continued as of August 2014[update].[39]

The Center for Biowogics Evawuation and Research is de branch of de FDA responsibwe for ensuring de safety and efficacy of biowogicaw derapeutic agents.[40] These incwude bwood and bwood products, vaccines, awwergenics, ceww and tissue-based products, and gene derapy products. New biowogics are reqwired to go drough a premarket approvaw process cawwed a Biowogics License Appwication (BLA), simiwar to dat for drugs.

Cwearance reqwests are for medicaw devices dat prove dey are "substantiawwy eqwivawent" to de predicate devices awready on de market. Approved reqwests are for items dat are new or substantiawwy different and need to demonstrate "safety and efficacy", for exampwe it may be inspected for safety in case of new toxic hazards. Bof aspects need to be proved or provided by de submitter to ensure proper procedures are fowwowed.[42]

The FDA does not approve appwied coatings used in de food processing industry.[43] There is no review process to approve de composition of nonstick coatings, nor does de FDA inspect or test dese materiaws. Through deir governing of processes, however, de FDA does have a set of reguwations dat cover de formuwation, manufacturing, and use of nonstick coatings. Hence, materiaws wike Powytetrafwuoroedywene (Tefwon) are not, and cannot be, considered as FDA Approved, rader, dey are "FDA Compwiant" or "FDA Acceptabwe".

Cosmetics are reguwated by de Center for Food Safety and Appwied Nutrition, de same branch of de FDA dat reguwates food. Cosmetic products are not, in generaw, subject to premarket approvaw by de FDA unwess dey make "structure or function cwaims" dat make dem into drugs (see Cosmeceuticaw). However, aww cowor additives must be specificawwy FDA approved before manufacturers can incwude dem in cosmetic products sowd in de U.S. The FDA reguwates cosmetics wabewing, and cosmetics dat have not been safety tested must bear a warning to dat effect.

Though de cosmetic industry is predominantwy responsibwe in ensuring de safety of its products, de FDA awso has de power to intervene when necessary to protect de pubwic but in generaw does not reqwire pre-market approvaw or testing. Companies are reqwired to pwace a warning note on deir products if dey have not been tested. Experts in cosmetic ingredient reviews awso pway a rowe in monitoring safety drough infwuence on de use of ingredients, but awso wack wegaw audority. Overaww de organization has reviewed about 1,200 ingredients and has suggested dat severaw hundred be restricted, but dere is no standard or systemic medod for reviewing chemicaws for safety and a cwear definition of what is meant by 'safety' so dat aww chemicaws are tested on de same basis.[44]

CVM's primary focus is on medications dat are used in food animaws and ensuring dat dey do not affect de human food suppwy. The FDA's reqwirements to prevent de spread of bovine spongiform encephawopady are awso administered by CVM drough inspections of feed manufacturers.[citation needed]

In 2009, Congress passed a waw reqwiring cowor warnings on cigarette packages and on printed advertising, in addition to text warnings from de U.S. Surgeon Generaw.[47]

The nine new graphic warning wabews were announced by de FDA in June 2011 and were scheduwed to be reqwired to appear on packaging by September 2012. The impwementation date is uncertain, due to ongoing proceedings in de case of R.J. Reynowds Tobacco Co. v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, uh-hah-hah-hah.[48]R.J. Reynowds, Loriwward, Commonweawf Brands Inc., Liggett Group LLC and Santa Fe Naturaw Tobacco Company Inc. have fiwed suit in Washington, D.C. federaw court cwaiming dat de graphic wabews are an unconstitutionaw way of forcing tobacco companies to engage in anti-smoking advocacy on de government's behawf.[49]

A First Amendment wawyer, Fwoyd Abrams, is representing de tobacco companies in de case, contending reqwiring graphic warning wabews on a wawfuw product cannot widstand constitutionaw scrutiny.[50] The Association of Nationaw Advertisers and de American Advertising Federation have awso fiwed a brief in de suit, arguing dat de wabews infringe on commerciaw free speech and couwd wead to furder government intrusion if weft unchawwenged.[51] In November 2011, Federaw judge Richard Leon of de U.S. District Court for de District of Cowumbia temporariwy hawted de new wabews, wikewy dewaying de reqwirement dat tobacco companies dispway de wabews. The U.S. Supreme Court uwtimatewy couwd decide de matter.[52]

In Juwy 2017, de FDA announced a pwan dat wouwd reduce de current wevews of nicotine permitted in tobacco cigarettes.[53]

Wif acceptance of premarket notification 510(k) k033391 in January 2004, de FDA granted Dr. Ronawd Sherman permission to produce and market medicaw maggots for use in humans or oder animaws as a prescription medicaw device. Medicaw maggots represent de first wiving organism awwowed by de Food and Drug Administration for production and marketing as a prescription medicaw device.

In June 2004, de FDA cweared Hirudo medicinawis (medicinaw weeches) as de second wiving organism to be used as a medicaw device.

In addition to its reguwatory functions, de FDA carries out research and devewopment activities to devewop technowogy and standards dat support its reguwatory rowe, wif de objective of resowving scientific and technicaw chawwenges before dey become impediments. The FDA's research efforts incwude de areas of biowogics, medicaw devices, drugs, women's heawf, toxicowogy, food safety and appwied nutrition, and veterinary medicine.[54]

Up untiw de 20f century, dere were few federaw waws reguwating de contents and sawe of domesticawwy produced food and pharmaceuticaws, wif one exception being de short-wived Vaccine Act of 1813. The history of de FDA can be traced to de watter part of de 19f century and de U.S. Department of Agricuwture's Division of Chemistry, water its Bureau of Chemistry. Under Harvey Washington Wiwey, appointed chief chemist in 1883, de Division began conducting research into de aduwteration and misbranding of food and drugs on de American market. Wiwey's advocacy came at a time when de pubwic had become aroused to hazards in de marketpwace by muckraking journawists wike Upton Sincwair, and became part of a generaw trend for increased federaw reguwations in matters pertinent to pubwic safety during de Progressive Era.[55] The 1902 Biowogics Controw Act was put in pwace after a diphderia antitoxin—derived from tetanus-contaminated serum—was used to produce a vaccine dat caused de deads of dirteen chiwdren in St. Louis, Missouri. The serum was originawwy cowwected from a horse named Jim, who had contracted tetanus.

In June 1906, President Theodore Roosevewt signed into waw de Pure Food and Drug Act, awso known as de "Wiwey Act" after its chief advocate.[55] The Act prohibited, under penawty of seizure of goods, de interstate transport of food dat had been "aduwterated". The act appwied simiwar penawties to de interstate marketing of "aduwterated" drugs, in which de "standard of strengf, qwawity, or purity" of de active ingredient was not eider stated cwearwy on de wabew or wisted in de United States Pharmacopoeia or de Nationaw Formuwary.[56]

The responsibiwity for examining food and drugs for such "aduwteration" or "misbranding" was given to Wiwey's USDA Bureau of Chemistry.[55] Wiwey used dese new reguwatory powers to pursue an aggressive campaign against de manufacturers of foods wif chemicaw additives, but de Chemistry Bureau's audority was soon checked by judiciaw decisions, which narrowwy defined de bureau's powers and set high standards for proof of frauduwent intent.[55] In 1927, de Bureau of Chemistry's reguwatory powers were reorganized under a new USDA body, de Food, Drug, and Insecticide organization, uh-hah-hah-hah. This name was shortened to de Food and Drug Administration (FDA) dree years water.[57]

By de 1930s, muckraking journawists, consumer protection organizations, and federaw reguwators began mounting a campaign for stronger reguwatory audority by pubwicizing a wist of injurious products dat had been ruwed permissibwe under de 1906 waw, incwuding radioactivebeverages, de mascara Lash wure, which caused bwindness, and wordwess "cures" for diabetes and tubercuwosis. The resuwting proposed waw was unabwe to get drough de Congress of de United States for five years, but was rapidwy enacted into waw fowwowing de pubwic outcry over de 1937 Ewixir Suwfaniwamide tragedy, in which over 100 peopwe died after using a drug formuwated wif a toxic, untested sowvent.[58]

President Frankwin Dewano Roosevewt signed de new Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) into waw on June 24, 1938. The new waw significantwy increased federaw reguwatory audority over drugs by mandating a pre-market review of de safety of aww new drugs, as weww as banning fawse derapeutic cwaims in drug wabewing widout reqwiring dat de FDA prove frauduwent intent. Soon after passage of de 1938 Act, de FDA began to designate certain drugs as safe for use onwy under de supervision of a medicaw professionaw, and de category of "prescription-onwy" drugs was securewy codified into waw by de 1951 Durham-Humphrey Amendment. These devewopments confirmed extensive powers for de FDA to enforce post-marketing recawws of ineffective drugs.[55]

Medicaw Officer Awexander Fweming, M. D., examines a portion of a 240-vowume new drug appwication around de wate 1980s. Appwications grew considerabwy after de efficacy mandate under de 1962 Drug Amendments.

In 1959, de dawidomide tragedy, in which dousands of European babies were born deformed after deir moders took dat drug – marketed for treatment of nausea – during deir pregnancies,[59] Considering de US was wargewy spared dat tragedy because Dr. Frances Owdham Kewsey of de FDA refused to audorize de medication for market, de 1962 Kefauver-Harris Amendment to de FD&C Act was passed, which represented a "revowution" in FDA reguwatory audority.[60] The most important change was de reqwirement dat aww new drug appwications demonstrate "substantiaw evidence" of de drug's efficacy for a marketed indication, in addition to de existing reqwirement for pre-marketing demonstration of safety. This marked de start of de FDA approvaw process in its modern form.

These reforms had de effect of increasing de time, and de difficuwty, reqwired to bring a drug to market.[61] One of de most important statutes in estabwishing de modern American pharmaceuticaw market was de 1984 Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act, more commonwy known as de "Hatch-Waxman Act" after its chief sponsors. The act extended de patent excwusivity terms of new drugs, and tied dose extensions, in part, to de wengf of de FDA approvaw process for each individuaw drug. For generic manufacturers, de Act created a new approvaw mechanism, de Abbreviated New Drug Appwication (ANDA), in which de generic drug manufacturer need onwy demonstrate dat deir generic formuwation has de same active ingredient, route of administration, dosage form, strengf, and pharmacokinetic properties ("bioeqwivawence") as de corresponding brand-name drug. This act has been credited wif in essence creating de modern generic drug industry.[62]

Concerns about de wengf of de drug approvaw process were brought to de fore earwy in de AIDS epidemic. In de mid- and wate 1980s, ACT-UP and oder HIV activist organizations accused de FDA of unnecessariwy dewaying de approvaw of medications to fight HIV and opportunistic infections.[63] Partwy in response to dese criticisms, de FDA issued new ruwes to expedite approvaw of drugs for wife-dreatening diseases, and expanded pre-approvaw access to drugs for patients wif wimited treatment options.[64] Aww of de initiaw drugs approved for de treatment of HIV/AIDS were approved drough dese accewerated approvaw mechanisms.[65] Frank Young, de commissioner of de FDA was behind de Action Pwan Phase II, estabwished in August 1987 for qwicker approvaw of AIDS medication, uh-hah-hah-hah.[66]

In two instances, state governments have sought to wegawize drugs dat de FDA has not approved. Under de deory dat federaw waw passed pursuant to Constitutionaw audority overruwes confwicting state waws, federaw audorities stiww cwaim de audority to seize, arrest, and prosecute for possession and sawes of dese substances,[citation needed] even in states where dey are wegaw under state waw. The first wave was de wegawization by 27 states of waetriwe in de wate 1970s. This drug was used as a treatment for cancer, but scientific studies bof before and after dis wegiswative trend found it to be ineffective.[67][68] The second wave concerned medicaw marijuana in de 1990s and 2000s. Though Virginia passed a waw wif wimited effect in 1979, a more widespread trend began in Cawifornia in 1996.

The Criticaw Paf Initiative[70] is FDA's effort to stimuwate and faciwitate a nationaw effort to modernize de sciences drough which FDA-reguwated products are devewoped, evawuated, and manufactured. The Initiative was waunched in March 2004, wif de rewease of a report entitwed Innovation/Stagnation: Chawwenge and Opportunity on de Criticaw Paf to New Medicaw Products.[71]

A 2006 court case, Abigaiw Awwiance v. von Eschenbach, wouwd have forced radicaw changes in FDA reguwation of unapproved drugs. The Abigaiw Awwiance argued dat de FDA must wicense drugs for use by terminawwy iww patients wif "desperate diagnoses," after dey have compweted Phase I testing.[73] The case won an initiaw appeaw in May 2006, but dat decision was reversed by a March 2007 rehearing. The US Supreme Court decwined to hear de case, and de finaw decision denied de existence of a right to unapproved medications.

Critics of de FDA's reguwatory power argue dat de FDA takes too wong to approve drugs dat might ease pain and human suffering faster if brought to market sooner. The AIDS crisis created some powiticaw efforts to streamwine de approvaw process. However, dese wimited reforms were targeted for AIDS drugs, not for de broader market. This has wed to de caww for more robust and enduring reforms dat wouwd awwow patients, under de care of deir doctors, access to drugs dat have passed de first round of cwinicaw triaws.[74][75]

The widewy pubwicized recaww of Vioxx, a non-steroidaw anti-infwammatory drug now estimated to have contributed to fataw heart attacks in dousands of Americans, pwayed a strong rowe in driving a new wave of safety reforms at bof de FDA ruwemaking and statutory wevews. Vioxx was approved by de FDA in 1999, and was initiawwy hoped to be safer dan previous NSAIDs, due to its reduced risk of intestinaw tract bweeding. However, a number of pre- and post-marketing studies suggested dat Vioxx might increase de risk of myocardiaw infarction, and dis was concwusivewy demonstrated by resuwts from de APPROVe triaw in 2004.[76]

Faced wif numerous wawsuits, de manufacturer vowuntariwy widdrew it from de market. The exampwe of Vioxx has been prominent in an ongoing debate over wheder new drugs shouwd be evawuated on de basis of deir absowute safety, or deir safety rewative to existing treatments for a given condition, uh-hah-hah-hah. In de wake of de Vioxx recaww, dere were widespread cawws by major newspapers, medicaw journaws, consumer advocacy organizations, wawmakers, and FDA officiaws[77] for reforms in de FDA's procedures for pre- and post- market drug safety reguwation, uh-hah-hah-hah.

In 2006, a congressionawwy reqwested committee was appointed by de Institute of Medicine to review pharmaceuticaw safety reguwation in de U.S. and to issue recommendations for improvements. The committee was composed of 16 experts, incwuding weaders in cwinicaw medicinemedicaw research, economics, biostatistics, waw, pubwic powicy, pubwic heawf, and de awwied heawf professions, as weww as current and former executives from de pharmaceuticaw, hospitaw, and heawf insurance industries. The audors found major deficiencies in de current FDA system for ensuring de safety of drugs on de American market. Overaww, de audors cawwed for an increase in de reguwatory powers, funding, and independence of de FDA.[78][79] Some of de committee's recommendations have been incorporated into drafts of de PDUFA IV biww, which was signed into waw in 2007.[80]

As of 2011, Risk Minimization Action Pwans (RiskMAPS) have been created to ensure risks of a drug never outweigh de benefits of dat drug widin de postmarketing period. This program reqwires dat manufacturers design and impwement periodic assessments of deir programs' effectiveness. The Risk Minimization Action Pwans are set in pwace depending on de overaww wevew of risk a prescription drug is wikewy to pose to de pubwic.[81]

Prior to de 1990s, onwy 20% of aww drugs prescribed for chiwdren in de United States were tested for safety or efficacy in a pediatric popuwation, uh-hah-hah-hah. This became a major concern of pediatricians as evidence accumuwated dat de physiowogicaw response of chiwdren to many drugs differed significantwy from dose drugs' effects on aduwts. Chiwdren react different to de drugs because of many reason, incwuding size, weight, etc. There were severaw reasons dat not many medicaw triaws were done wif chiwdren, uh-hah-hah-hah. For many drugs, chiwdren represented such a smaww proportion of de potentiaw market, dat drug manufacturers did not see such testing as cost-effective.[82]

Awso, because chiwdren were dought to be edicawwy restricted in deir abiwity to give informed consent, dere were increased governmentaw and institutionaw hurdwes to approvaw of dese cwinicaw triaws, as weww as greater concerns about wegaw wiabiwity. Thus, for decades, most medicines prescribed to chiwdren in de U.S. were done so in a non-FDA-approved, "off-wabew" manner, wif dosages "extrapowated" from aduwt data drough body weight and body-surface-area cawcuwations.[82]

An initiaw attempt by de FDA to address dis issue was de 1994 FDA Finaw Ruwe on Pediatric Labewing and Extrapowation, which awwowed manufacturers to add pediatric wabewing information, but reqwired drugs dat had not been tested for pediatric safety and efficacy to bear a discwaimer to dat effect. However, dis ruwe faiwed to motivate many drug companies to conduct additionaw pediatric drug triaws. In 1997, de FDA proposed a ruwe to reqwire pediatric drug triaws from de sponsors of New Drug Appwications. However, dis new ruwe was successfuwwy preempted in federaw court as exceeding de FDA's statutory audority.[82]

The priority review voucher is a provision of de Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act (HR 3580) signed by President George W. Bush signed de biww in September 2007 which awards a transferabwe "priority review voucher" to any company dat obtains approvaw for a treatment for a negwected tropicaw diseases. The system was first proposed by Duke University facuwty David Ridwey, Henry Grabowski, and Jeffrey Moe in deir 2006 Heawf Affairs paper: "Devewoping Drugs for Devewoping Countries".[83] In 2012, President Obama signed into waw de FDA Safety and Innovation Act which incwudes Section 908 de "Rare Pediatric Disease Priority Review Voucher Incentive Program".[84]

Biotechnowogy drugs do not have de simpwe, readiwy verifiabwe chemicaw structures of conventionaw drugs, and are produced drough compwex, often proprietary techniqwes, such as transgenic mammawian ceww cuwtures. Because of dese compwexities, de 1984 Hatch-Waxman Act did not incwude biowogics in de Abbreviated New Drug Appwication (ANDA) process, in essence precwuding de possibiwity of generic drug competition for biotechnowogy drugs. In February 2007, identicaw biwws were introduced into de House to create an ANDA process for de approvaw of generic biowogics, but were not passed.[85]

In 2013, a guidance was issued to reguwate mobiwe medicaw appwications and protect users from deir unintended use. This guidance distinguishes de apps subjected to reguwation based on de marketing cwaims of de apps.[86] Incorporation of de guidewines during de devewopment phase of such app has been proposed for expedite market entry and cwearance.[87]

The FDA has reguwatory oversight over a warge array of products dat affect de heawf and wife of American citizens.[55] As a resuwt, de FDA's powers and decisions are carefuwwy monitored by severaw governmentaw and non-governmentaw organizations. A $1.8 miwwion 2006 Institute of Medicine report on pharmaceuticaw reguwation in de U.S. found major deficiencies in de current FDA system for ensuring de safety of drugs on de American market. Overaww, de audors cawwed for an increase in de reguwatory powers, funding, and independence of de FDA.[88][89]

Nine FDA scientists appeawed to den president-ewect Barack Obama over pressures from management, experienced during de George W. Bush presidency, to manipuwate data, incwuding in rewation to de review process for medicaw devices. Characterized as "corrupted and distorted by current FDA managers, dereby pwacing de American peopwe at risk," dese concerns were awso highwighted in de 2006 report[88] on de agency as weww.[90]

The FDA has awso been criticized from de opposite viewpoint, as being too tough on industry. According to an anawysis pubwished on de website of de wibertarianMercatus Center as weww as pubwished statements by economists, medicaw practitioners, and concerned consumers, many feew de FDA oversteps its reguwatory powers and undermines smaww business and smaww farms in favor of warge corporations. Three of de FDA restrictions under anawysis are de permitting of new drugs and devices, de controw of manufacturer speech, and de imposition of prescription reqwirements. The audors argue dat in de increasingwy compwex and diverse food marketpwace, de FDA is not eqwipped to adeqwatewy reguwate or inspect food.[91][verification needed] In addition, excessive reguwation is bwamed for de rising costs of heawf care and de creation of monopowies, as potentiaw competitors are unabwe to get FDA approvaw to enter de market to compete and keep heawf care costs down, uh-hah-hah-hah.[92]

However, in an indicator dat de FDA may be too wax in deir approvaw process, in particuwar for medicaw devices, a 2011 study by Dr. Diana Zuckerman and Pauw Brown of de Nationaw Research Center for Women and Famiwies, and Dr. Steven Nissen of de Cwevewand Cwinic, pubwished in de Archives of Internaw Medicine, showed dat most medicaw devices recawwed in de wast five years for "serious heawf probwems or deaf" had been previouswy approved by de FDA using de wess stringent, and cheaper, 510(k) process. In a few cases de devices had been deemed so wow-risk dat dey did not need FDA reguwation, uh-hah-hah-hah. Of de 113 devices recawwed, 35 were for cardiovascuwar heawf purposes.[93]

^"About de FDA Organization Charts". U.S Food and Drug Administration, uh-hah-hah-hah. August 29, 2014. Retrieved Juwy 19, 2015. FDA is an agency widin de Department of Heawf and Human Services and consists of nine Centers and Offices, which are wisted on de menu to de weft.

^Ross G (2006). "A perspective on de safety of cosmetic products: a position paper of de American Counciw on Science and Heawf". Int. J. Toxicow. 25 (4): 269–77. doi:10.1080/10915810600746049. PMID16815815.

^Modric, S (September 2013). "Reguwatory framework for de avaiwabiwity and use of animaw drugs in de United States". The Veterinary cwinics of Norf America. Smaww animaw practice. 43 (5): 1005–12. doi:10.1016/j.cvsm.2013.04.001. PMID23890234.

^"FDA reqwests removaw of Opana ER for risks rewated to abuse" (Press rewease). Siwver Spring, Marywand. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, uh-hah-hah-hah. June 8, 2017. Retrieved October 26, 2017. Today, de U.S. Food and Drug Administration reqwested dat Endo Pharmaceuticaws remove its opioid pain medication, reformuwated Opana ER (oxymorphone hydrochworide), from de market... This is de first time de agency has taken steps to remove a currentwy marketed opioid pain medication from sawe due to de pubwic heawf conseqwences of abuse...[FDA Commissioner Scott Gottwieb, M.D.]: "We are facing an opioid epidemic – a pubwic heawf crisis, and we must take aww necessary steps to reduce de scope of opioid misuse and abuse.